Besides that to me the tones below F#-staff bottom down to first pedal C feel like fakes! In comparison to double pedal C down to F#. Can be fingered quite easily (after a while....).Like discovering you have another room behind a closed door in your system.

Now I didn't mean the range below F# downto first pedal C. These ARE fake pedals indeed, and I don't play them.
I meant the range from first pedal C downto first pedal F#. They are quite hard to play (in tune) and require a lot of RO.

For me, playing these instead of the double pedals by no means invalidates the BE principles of a balance between RO and RI.

Besides that to me the tones below F#-staff bottom down to first pedal C feel like fakes! In comparison to double pedal C down to F#. Can be fingered quite easily (after a while....).Like discovering you have another room behind a closed door in your system.

Now I didn't mean the range below F# downto first pedal C. These ARE fake pedals indeed, and I don't play them.
I meant the range from first pedal C downto first pedal F#. They are quite hard to play (in tune) and require a lot of RO.

For me, playing these instead of the double pedals by no means invalidates the BE principles of a balance between RO and RI.

Oh dear Really, I never thought of these - but just played them! From high C down to double pedal C and then down to next C. Another door
Certainly you have a point! I will push this envelope gently - "these stairs might be treacherous" (Mel Brooks on Frankenstein) indeed not easy to hit and do it in tune! Thanks!
To me not that huge amount of rolling out though._________________Cornets:
Getzen Custom Series Denis Wick Ultra 7C
Getzen 300 series
Yamaha YCRD2330II
Getzen Eterna Eb /M V 1 1/2 C
Trumpets:
Yamaha 6335 RC
King Super 20 Symphony DB (1970) Stork VM6
Selmer Eb/D trumpet (1973)/Stork VMS6

(You mean from high C down to pedal C and then down to double pedal C, I think)

After studying these normal pedals for a while, I think they should be incorporated on your way down to double pedals. If you skip this intermediate roll-out stage, you could be playing the double pedals with a false (non-effective) setup.
On the other hand, when you ARE going to play the pedals on your way down to double, you will notice that your lip setup will prepare for the roll-out already at the start from high C! Just like you would prepare for the roll-in to be made when going up to high C. (Which is what the TOL exercise is about).
Which brings me a bit back on-topic I think Because of this: a well-balanced embouchure not only incorporates RI in all registers but also RO. (For me) RI has to do mostly with the upper lip, while RO mostly involves the corners and under lip.

By the way, I discovered the pedal range on Charlie Porter's Youtube channel in a video titled Exploring pedal tones.

<<<After studying these normal pedals for a while, I think they should be incorporated on your way down to double pedals. If you skip this intermediate roll-out stage, you could be playing the double pedals with a false (non-effective) setup. >>>

A lot of what you have said so far has also been my experience, particularly the part about how RI and RO are actually incorporated in every register. And I'm glad that you are experiencing success at BE. But regarding your comments about the first octave of pedals, I respectfully disagree.

I had my students play the pedal range you are talking about for decades. In my experience, they do not "correct" anything regarding how Callet-style double pedals are done. Callet style double pedals are a different animal, and NOT connected in any way to how Maggio and Gordon style pedals are done. It wasn't until I had my students shift to the extreme RO Callet style that my students began to see spectacular progress.

Plus, as a Claude Gordon student, I did those pedals (pedal C to pedal F#) virtually every day for 10 years. Again, for me they didn't make Callet style double pedals easier in any way.

My goal in BE is to stick to proven essentials that actually work over a wide student population, and to keep unnecessary effort and confusion to a minimum. If you want to add extra stuff, then that is your choice. My experience is that for every time that players add more stuff to help make BE better, they end up going down a negative path about 7 out of 10 times. Plus, most BE buyers who contact me with problems, are actually adding extra stuff and not doing the exercises properly. Once they start doing the exercises correctly, everything changes.

If extra stuff works for you, great. My point is that a lot needs to be considered before promoting something as a universal benefit.

(You mean from high C down to pedal C and then down to double pedal C, I think)

After studying these normal pedals for a while, I think they should be incorporated on your way down to double pedals. If you skip this intermediate roll-out stage, you could be playing the double pedals with a false (non-effective) setup.
On the other hand, when you ARE going to play the pedals on your way down to double, you will notice that your lip setup will prepare for the roll-out already at the start from high C! Just like you would prepare for the roll-in to be made when going up to high C. (Which is what the TOL exercise is about).
Which brings me a bit back on-topic I think Because of this: a well-balanced embouchure not only incorporates RI in all registers but also RO. (For me) RI has to do mostly with the upper lip, while RO mostly involves the corners and under lip.

By the way, I discovered the pedal range on Charlie Porter's Youtube channel in a video titled Exploring pedal tones.

Nope, I ment from high C (3) down to low C(1) down to pedal C-1, then down to double pedal C-2 then further down to next pedal C (-3). And the double pedals do not appear as fakes; e.g.some notes do on the way down, from F# staff bottom down to first pedal C (-1).

I had my students play the pedal range you are talking about for decades. In my experience, they do not "correct" anything regarding how Callet-style double pedals are done. Callet style double pedals are a different animal, and NOT connected in any way to how Maggio and Gordon style pedals are done. It wasn't until I had my students shift to the extreme RO Callet style that my students began to see spectacular progress.

Plus, as a Claude Gordon student, I did those pedals (pedal C to pedal F#) virtually every day for 10 years. Again, for me they didn't make Callet style double pedals easier in any way.

Thank you, Jeff, for explaining this and correcting me! I must apologize for going a bit too far in my reasoning about single vs. double pedals. My actual experience so far is indeed that single and double pedals are really different animals that cannot be combined in a single exercise or method.

trumpetteacher1 wrote:

My goal in BE is to stick to proven essentials that actually work over a wide student population, and to keep unnecessary effort and confusion to a minimum. If you want to add extra stuff, then that is your choice. My experience is that for every time that players add more stuff to help make BE better, they end up going down a negative path about 7 out of 10 times. Plus, most BE buyers who contact me with problems, are actually adding extra stuff and not doing the exercises properly. Once they start doing the exercises correctly, everything changes.

If extra stuff works for you, great. My point is that a lot needs to be considered before promoting something as a universal benefit.

Again my apologies! I didn't intend to amend the BE method (just went a bit too far in my enthusiasm), nor would I be qualified at all to do that. I just was curious why single pedals were left out of BE, and I'm just beginning to understand!

Maarten, no need to apologize. I'm always happy to see your posts. Just about anything can be discussed on this forum, within reason. You are correct that I did not explain in the book why the single pedals were not included. Your question has given me the opportunity to explain here, so thank you.

<<<My actual experience so far is indeed that single and double pedals are really different animals that cannot be combined in a single exercise or method. >>>

Just to clarify, singles and doubles can indeed be combined in a single method. That is exactly what the Claude Gordon Systematic Approach does. In Claude's method, the goal is to play the entire pedal register with as little change to the embouchure as is possible. And that is far different from the approach of BE, where Callet-style pedals are done in a way that actually force you to change your embouchure - a change that activates certain facial muscles and creates benefits which are not present in other ways of doing pedals.

I still have students - on occasion - learn to play the first pedal octave. There are benefits there - but they pale in comparison to the benefits from doing Callet-style pedals.

I did not come to this conclusion lightly. I have taught over 20,000 lessons, and at least half of those were done using Claude Gordon and tongue arch stuff as my primary chops-development method. And I had a lot of successful students. But when I switched students to Callet-style pedals, and an emphasis on lip position development, the improvement just shocked me.

Thank you, Jeff, for the explanation.
Happy to hear that the single pedals are not an absolute no-go.
For me, they seem to contribute to the muscular strength of the rollout.
I returned to double pedals these days, and they seem easier, have better intonation and sound more sonorous.
I think the point here is about how, and for what purpose, I do single pedals. If it is to build "rollout muscles", I think it's OK.

I returned to double pedals these days, and they seem easier, have better intonation and sound more sonorous.

Are you sure that you mean sonorous? That word means "rich" or "full." However, double pedals done Callet-style are neither rich nor full, but instead very narrow and focused, with virtually no overtones.

This may be a simple issue of semantics, but my experience is that many BE book users do not understand how the double pedals are supposed to sound, even though there are clear illustrations on the CD. Rather than imitate the suggested sound, they instead try to play something rich and broad (musical). In my experience, that does not yield the same benefits in lip position development.

Lately my favorite metaphor of this has become the idling screw of an outboard motor (2- stroke), the exhausts just lifting from the water.

That's a quite accurate description for the sound I'm getting out now.
As Jeff already suspected ... I wasn't doing RO the right way. Taking lessons from esteemed BE expert Bert (though not especially for BE purposes, but actually I'm glad he is), he took me back to basic RO instructions (p.62/63). Top lip IN the cup, bottom lip below, relax mouthcorners, etc.
At first I injured the middle of my top lip (a small blister), as the soft inner part of the lips is not yet capable of handling that low frequency at high amplitude. But, after 2 weeks of recovery, I'm back again, trying more carefully now. I'm already noticing the tremendous effects of this exercise for the high register. It is exactly those rolled-out inner parts of the lips that you need for controlling the sound up there.

RO is not about relaxing the mouth corners. The corners aren't locked, but they move forward and inward. As you should always strive towards greater focus, this is actually quite a workout.

Tilting the bell up a bit, as instructed, can be very helpful to prevent the top lip from collapsing in the mouthpiece cup.

Another suggestion is to keep in mind that you are primarily after focus, not loudness. As your focus develops and mouthpiece pressure is very light, it will be easier to add more volume. Which, admittedly, can be quite a bit of fun.

I had my students play the pedal range you are talking about for decades. ..
Plus, as a Claude Gordon student, I did those pedals (pedal C to pedal F#) virtually every day for 10 years.

Oh oh, I just ordered the BE book after a bad experience with CG pedals. I read some more on embouchure from someone who does not think pedals are useful and that pedals can cause harm, perhaps like what happened to me. I then figured my endurance problems were from too open a set point and maybe too much RO. Now I'm not keen on doing more pedals to grow fat lips. If they can be harmful if you do them wrong, and CG has you doing them from a fixed set point (never learned anything about fixed embouchure with CG), and Callet has you doing them way RO, then what is the bad way of doing them?

I had my students play the pedal range you are talking about for decades. ..
Plus, as a Claude Gordon student, I did those pedals (pedal C to pedal F#) virtually every day for 10 years.

Oh oh, I just ordered the BE book after a bad experience with CG pedals. I read some more on embouchure from someone who does not think pedals are useful and that pedals can cause harm, perhaps like what happened to me. I then figured my endurance problems were from too open a set point and maybe too much RO. Now I'm not keen on doing more pedals to grow fat lips. If they can be harmful if you do them wrong, and CG has you doing them from a fixed set point (never learned anything about fixed embouchure with CG), and Callet has you doing them way RO, then what is the bad way of doing them?

If you have a protruding top lip, then pedals can have a counterproductive effect. My experience is, once you learn to get a protrusion under control, then pedals can slowly be added into the routine. In other words, for players with a protrusion (loose lip tissue which falls into the mouthpiece cup), it is more of a two-stage process. If they jump right into pedals, they may simply exaggerate the protrusion issue.

So, the point is, there is not a "bad" way to do pedals. Some pedals are way more effective than others regarding the building of beneficial muscles and coordination, but pedals in general are harmless - unless you have a significant protrusion.

I hope this was clear. There is a lot of misunderstand on this point, for sure.

Don't think I have a protrusion problem. Guess the pedals being sustained so long were just causing more swelling than other practice. Then it would not have time to decrease due to regular daily practice. When I quit for a week, things seemed better.

I returned to double pedals these days, and they seem easier, have better intonation and sound more sonorous.

Are you sure that you mean sonorous? That word means "rich" or "full." However, double pedals done Callet-style are neither rich nor full, but instead very narrow and focused, with virtually no overtones.

This may be a simple issue of semantics, but my experience is that many BE book users do not understand how the double pedals are supposed to sound, even though there are clear illustrations on the CD. Rather than imitate the suggested sound, they instead try to play something rich and broad (musical). In my experience, that does not yield the same benefits in lip position development.

Just a caution.

Jeff

I was wondering about that when practicing the RO 1 for the first time.
The CD sounds very motorboat like, but I don't sound quite that bad. Maybe I need to press the lips together harder, not sure, or maybe a cornet doesn't sound quite like a trumpet on the CD? In any case I have a hard time getting Ab and not past that yet.

If you think that the correct sound is "bad," it may set up resistance in your mind and stop you from achieving it. I think of it as "compact" and as a means to an end (greater muscular focus).

As Ko said earlier, "RO is not about relaxing the mouth corners. The corners aren't locked, but they move forward and inward. As you should always strive towards greater focus, this is actually quite a workout."